Harris tax plan - raising taxes on high earners

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harris’s tax plan includes a tax on unrealized capital gains. That’s a huge tax hike on everyone with an IRA, 401k, or brokerage account. People who aren’t rich also have these accounts and will owe this new tax under her plan.

This is only for people with $100 million in wealth, and even then only a subset of them: https://www.axios.com/2024/08/23/kamala-harris-unrealized-capital-gains-tax

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harris’s tax plan includes a tax on unrealized capital gains. That’s a huge tax hike on everyone with an IRA, 401k, or brokerage account. People who aren’t rich also have these accounts and will owe this new tax under her plan.

Maybe brokerage. No impact on IRA or 401K. Try harder next time

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris’s tax plan includes a tax on unrealized capital gains. That’s a huge tax hike on everyone with an IRA, 401k, or brokerage account. People who aren’t rich also have these accounts and will owe this new tax under her plan.

This is only for people with $100 million in wealth, and even then only a subset of them: https://www.axios.com/2024/08/23/kamala-harris-unrealized-capital-gains-tax

It won't stop there and it will begin to impact normal people. This threshold will get lower overtime and it will eventually be used to take money from almost everyone that is not broke. The income tax used to only apply to super rich people when it came out and now almost everyone pays it. Also, the fact that the tax is explicitly tied to a specific level of wealth probably makes the tax unconstitutional at the federal level. Taxing unrealized gains is no necessarily unconstitutional, but an unrealized gain tax conditional on net worth is likely illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris’s tax plan includes a tax on unrealized capital gains. That’s a huge tax hike on everyone with an IRA, 401k, or brokerage account. People who aren’t rich also have these accounts and will owe this new tax under her plan.

This is only for people with $100 million in wealth, and even then only a subset of them: https://www.axios.com/2024/08/23/kamala-harris-unrealized-capital-gains-tax

It won't stop there and it will begin to impact normal people. This threshold will get lower overtime and it will eventually be used to take money from almost everyone that is not broke. The income tax used to only apply to super rich people when it came out and now almost everyone pays it. Also, the fact that the tax is explicitly tied to a specific level of wealth probably makes the tax unconstitutional at the federal level. Taxing unrealized gains is no necessarily unconstitutional, but an unrealized gain tax conditional on net worth is likely illegal.

Fearmongering. The thresholds will only change if Congress votes to do that. Going from $100M to $1M (which still misses the vast majority of Americans) is a huge shift. It’s not just going to happen.

And this is all missing the bigger point. The US is running a deficit and has a huge debt. Do you really want to keep your taxes low so that your kids have a collapsing government? Or do you want to raise taxes so they don’t end up dealing with our problem? Republicans have an aversion to any and all taxes but never make the difficult cuts to spending so just make the problem worse. At least Harris is trying to fix things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:$400k isn’t what it used to be with inflation. That price needs to be $600k

Inflation isn't what you think it is. It feels like a group of right wing trolls just discovered DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris’s tax plan includes a tax on unrealized capital gains. That’s a huge tax hike on everyone with an IRA, 401k, or brokerage account. People who aren’t rich also have these accounts and will owe this new tax under her plan.

This is only for people with $100 million in wealth, and even then only a subset of them: https://www.axios.com/2024/08/23/kamala-harris-unrealized-capital-gains-tax

It won't stop there and it will begin to impact normal people. This threshold will get lower overtime and it will eventually be used to take money from almost everyone that is not broke. The income tax used to only apply to super rich people when it came out and now almost everyone pays it. Also, the fact that the tax is explicitly tied to a specific level of wealth probably makes the tax unconstitutional at the federal level. Taxing unrealized gains is no necessarily unconstitutional, but an unrealized gain tax conditional on net worth is likely illegal.

Fearmongering. The thresholds will only change if Congress votes to do that. Going from $100M to $1M (which still misses the vast majority of Americans) is a huge shift. It’s not just going to happen.

And this is all missing the bigger point. The US is running a deficit and has a huge debt. Do you really want to keep your taxes low so that your kids have a collapsing government? Or do you want to raise taxes so they don’t end up dealing with our problem? Republicans have an aversion to any and all taxes but never make the difficult cuts to spending so just make the problem worse. At least Harris is trying to fix things.

I’m for cutting all spending, and reducing taxes. Reduce military spending (13 percent of budget, 820 billion), economic security programs (which is about 8 percent of the budget-550 billion), and audit and make more stringent the benefits for veterans, as many lie and hoodwink the system to collect a tax free check for the rest of their lives (7 percent of budget, 481 billion). With those reductions we can really start paying down the debt, and getting us to a point where we can reduce taxes for all citizens.

Just like in your everyday lives, if you have a credit card bill or loan that is eating up a lot of interest, you don’t go spend more. You cut back on spending and pay the bill off or it will get worse in the long term. We need to stop spending, and stop thinking that we can continue to squeeze everyone to pay for spending on failed policies/programs that just lead to more spending.

[Anonymous]

Yes, definitely see this in Salisbury, MD. One of my employees is Haitian American. Her sister (Haitian) was 8 months pregnant and walked across the border in Arizona. The pregnant illegal alien flew from Arizona to BWI (paid for by sister.) Pregnant Haitian gave birth at Tidal Health hospital in Salisbury. Paid for by you and I. My employee housed her sister and the baby for several months but the baby (a US citizen,) the illegal mother, and the mother's boyfriend got housing within several months, paid for by you and I.

The Wicomico County school district is struggling due to a very large percentage of students speaking Creole and no English.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris’s tax plan includes a tax on unrealized capital gains. That’s a huge tax hike on everyone with an IRA, 401k, or brokerage account. People who aren’t rich also have these accounts and will owe this new tax under her plan.

This would apply to households worth > $100 million. Are you really worried, pp, or just fear mongering?

DP. A tax on unrealized capital gains is pernicious. They will sell it by saying it applies only to the ultrarich, those worth over $100million, but the fact is it would set a precedent that would allow future taxing of unrealized gains for people at much lower income brackets (if determined to be constitutional, which it may not be). Remember when the AMT was to apply only to the "rich?"

In fact, the changes proposed to estate tax would apply an unrealized capital gains tax to estates over $5 million by construing death as a sales event. And you would have to pay estate taxes to boot. It is not hard to get to a $5 million estate in the DC area, where many perfectly ordinary houses are valued at close to $2 million. Someone leaving an estate of $5 million plus a bit more is not ultrarich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris’s tax plan includes a tax on unrealized capital gains. That’s a huge tax hike on everyone with an IRA, 401k, or brokerage account. People who aren’t rich also have these accounts and will owe this new tax under her plan.

This is only for people with $100 million in wealth, and even then only a subset of them: https://www.axios.com/2024/08/23/kamala-harris-unrealized-capital-gains-tax

It won't stop there and it will begin to impact normal people. This threshold will get lower overtime and it will eventually be used to take money from almost everyone that is not broke. The income tax used to only apply to super rich people when it came out and now almost everyone pays it. Also, the fact that the tax is explicitly tied to a specific level of wealth probably makes the tax unconstitutional at the federal level. Taxing unrealized gains is no necessarily unconstitutional, but an unrealized gain tax conditional on net worth is likely illegal.

Fearmongering. The thresholds will only change if Congress votes to do that. Going from $100M to $1M (which still misses the vast majority of Americans) is a huge shift. It’s not just going to happen.

And this is all missing the bigger point. The US is running a deficit and has a huge debt. Do you really want to keep your taxes low so that your kids have a collapsing government? Or do you want to raise taxes so they don’t end up dealing with our problem? Republicans have an aversion to any and all taxes but never make the difficult cuts to spending so just make the problem worse. At least Harris is trying to fix things.

I’m for cutting all spending, and reducing taxes. Reduce military spending (13 percent of budget, 820 billion), economic security programs (which is about 8 percent of the budget-550 billion), and audit and make more stringent the benefits for veterans, as many lie and hoodwink the system to collect a tax free check for the rest of their lives (7 percent of budget, 481 billion). With those reductions we can really start paying down the debt, and getting us to a point where we can reduce taxes for all citizens.

Just like in your everyday lives, if you have a credit card bill or loan that is eating up a lot of interest, you don’t go spend more. You cut back on spending and pay the bill off or it will get worse in the long term. We need to stop spending, and stop thinking that we can continue to squeeze everyone to pay for spending on failed policies/programs that just lead to more spending.

Great! Finally someone who proposes a real solution. Of course, with a $1.9T deficit you would have to eliminate ALL the $820B in defense spending, ALL the $550B in economic security, and ALL the veteran’s benefits of $481B just to break even. No tax reduction. No debt reduction. And literally millions of people thrown into unemployment and despair. But I do give you credit for balancing the budget without raising taxes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Their idea of high earners isn't location specific (COL is vastly diff in diff locations) or adjusted for inflation or considers 1 income households vs 2 income households (childcare exp. etc). It's simply stupid to consider 2 income household in a VHCOL area earning 400K to be "rich" or high earner anything. Likewise their poverty line is absolutely ridiculous and out of touch. I have no issue with slamming more brackets at HHI over 1 mil or taxing capital gains beyond a certain amount (like 1 mil in passive capital gains) at higher rate. But their limits on what they consider any type of "wealth" or excess are absolutely ridiculous.

It’s $400k in taxable income. So probably $600k or so in actual income. That is a high earner even in a VHCOL area.

+1. People seem to really struggle with this concept.

Tell me what deductions people can create to reduce 600K earned income to 400K?

It's not just about reducing *current* taxable income. High earners can also reduce future taxable income by using things like the mega backdoor Roth - this allows any you to put $69K per year into a Roth (or $76.5K if over 50). And this is on top of a regular backdoor Roth ($7K per year limit, or $8K if above age 50). This means two high-earners can put an astounding $152K per year into Roth IRAs (or $169K if above age 50).

You don't have to do that for too long before you can retire, and then the government would never get another dollar in taxes from you. So it's not just about reducing current taxable income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We earn less than 300k/year and there are multiple tax increases that would apply to us (married filing jointly) in her plan. That’s the #1 reason I am voting for Trump after voting for Biden in 2020.

Which ones?

Also you are going to get smacked when the Trump tax cut expire next year. You realize these proposals are intended to help extend those cuts?

Harris is planning to let the Trump tax cuts of 2017 expire to replace them with tax hikes.

Listen to her in her own words explain how she is planning to extend the low income housing tax credit program (a Congressional allocation) to developers of her choosing who will sell homes to chosen demographics in a bid, in her own words, to hike property tax revenues nationwide. She responded this way (although with more rambling) to a recent reporter question. Google around and find it. When I saw it, it was on Sky News.

This is true. She wants to promote low income housing nationwide, which means higher property taxes for everyone since most of the low-income free riders consume more local resources than they contribute in property taxes.

Stop lying and read better news sources. You aren’t citing anything to back up these claims.

What is with you Trump supporters? Are you taking a page from his handbook where you think it’s ok to spew lies and think no one will refute them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Funny thread.. All the eco warriors and LGBTQABCD warriors suddenly want to vote for Trump because their taxes go up a smidge. More than likely she won't have congressional support for most of these proposals and will end up with something rather tame.. much like the pathetic gun control legislation we normally get. So, chill.

If it really ends up being as bad as OP's propaganda, pay up. If you make $400K+, you are afford to. It will still be progressive.

I really hate the "you can afford it" crowd. Makes me even more determined to vote red. And I am pro choice, pro LGBTQ, pro environment. But the biggest impact that politics has on me, personally, is how much of MY money that I use to care for MY loved ones are they going to take. So I hold my nose and vote Republican. I always say, if Republicans would drop their stupid social platforms, they'd be the perfect party. And so would Dems, if they would drop the revolting "you can afford it" + "fair share" BS that disincentivizes hard work and productivity and encourages laziness and hands out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funny thread.. All the eco warriors and LGBTQABCD warriors suddenly want to vote for Trump because their taxes go up a smidge. More than likely she won't have congressional support for most of these proposals and will end up with something rather tame.. much like the pathetic gun control legislation we normally get. So, chill.

If it really ends up being as bad as OP's propaganda, pay up. If you make $400K+, you are afford to. It will still be progressive.

I really hate the "you can afford it" crowd. Makes me even more determined to vote red. And I am pro choice, pro LGBTQ, pro environment. But the biggest impact that politics has on me, personally, is how much of MY money that I use to care for MY loved ones are they going to take. So I hold my nose and vote Republican. I always say, if Republicans would drop their stupid social platforms, they'd be the perfect party. And so would Dems, if they would drop the revolting "you can afford it" + "fair share" BS that disincentivizes hard work and productivity and encourages laziness and hands out.

Your kids must love you. F them as long as you get yours, am I right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funny thread.. All the eco warriors and LGBTQABCD warriors suddenly want to vote for Trump because their taxes go up a smidge. More than likely she won't have congressional support for most of these proposals and will end up with something rather tame.. much like the pathetic gun control legislation we normally get. So, chill.

If it really ends up being as bad as OP's propaganda, pay up. If you make $400K+, you are afford to. It will still be progressive.

I really hate the "you can afford it" crowd. Makes me even more determined to vote red. And I am pro choice, pro LGBTQ, pro environment. But the biggest impact that politics has on me, personally, is how much of MY money that I use to care for MY loved ones are they going to take. So I hold my nose and vote Republican. I always say, if Republicans would drop their stupid social platforms, they'd be the perfect party. And so would Dems, if they would drop the revolting "you can afford it" + "fair share" BS that disincentivizes hard work and productivity and encourages laziness and hands out.

Your kids must love you. F them as long as you get yours, am I right?

+1 not caring about your kids' bodily autonomy, medical care or their wellbeing with climate change and pollution because "MY money" makes you a shitty human being.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is what is wrong, IMO. DH and I are taxed out of half of our paychecks, while billionaires pay nothing! This is how, no matter the party, they screw us in the middle. Half of my paycheck is going to taxes, and no, it is not ok when the millionaires and billionaires pay nothing.
And then, I had to pay full in-state tuition for my kids, who did not even qualify for any aid from BCS. We don't earn that little, but we sure could not afford full rides, either. If my kids were allowed to take student loans, they would have been forgiven now. But they were not allowed to have that option.
No, it is not better for me under republicans because it is all the same for me, no relief ever. I don't qualify for any housing aid, meal programs, or student financial aid, but I sure can't afford an SFH that is the median price for the DMV.

+1. Grew up very poor, like free school lunch, public housing poor. Earn close to $1 annually now with a healthy net worth. No, we don't like to pay more than we have to but I look back and thankful for the social net that pulled us through. The dem party not the same as it used to be however, too many handouts for votes but.....